patrick.net

futuresmc says

f we funded education through state taxes instead of local taxes and required equal per pupil spending,

You want to take away power from all the local school boards with all their petty local politics and egos? Good luck with that.

CaptainShuddup says

The verbal lashings will continue until Obama's effectiveness improves

Right.

You and your heroes (the right wing) all predicted he would be terrible, and then at every turn you did everything you could to prevent him from doing anything.

Now you complain he isn't more effective, and get excited at every possible percieved government injustice that you think (hope) can be pinned on Obama.

It's pathetic really.

AverageBear says

Bush had flaws other than being a fiscal wus. Obama took that one flaw to a new hideous art-form.

That's where you have no clue.

Is it that the stimulus should have been more that bothers you ? Or was it that he increased spending so much less that any of the previous recent presidents ?

Let me guess. It's because tax revenues decreased in the depression, relative to all the spending that was already put in motion before Obama even got there.

If it's that he didn't let the Bush tax cuts expire in 2010 like everyone said they would, then I would agree. He was a wuss about that.

bob2356 says

You want to take away power from all the local school boards with all their petty local politics and egos? Good luck with that.

Compared to a state legislature, local boards have no power. All they can do is whine to the press and even there the state reps would have more juice. The real opponents would be those who own homes in high value districts, those who profit directly from the status quo, and those who wish to eliminate public education altogether.

Also, I didn't say you take the power from local school boards, only collect taxes and distribute the money at the state level instead of the local. This would be about equitizing educational funding between districts in the same state.

futuresmc says

Compared to a state legislature, local boards have no power. All they can do is whine to the press and even there the state reps would have more juice. The real opponents would be those who own homes in high value districts, those who profit directly from the status quo, and those who wish to eliminate public education altogether.

Also, I didn't say you take the power from local school boards, only collect taxes and distribute the money at the state level instead of the local. This would be about equitizing educational funding between districts in the same state.

First off, I used to serve on the local school board. I know a little bit about all this.

In California, school funding is not based on local taxes. It is based on ADA, or Average Daily Attendance. Schools get funded based on how many kids are in seats. There isn't a huge disparity either between districts in poor vs rich areas, due to the Serrano v Priest Case from the 1970s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serrano_v._Priest $300 is the max per student discrepancy from one district to another. (that isn't counting federal aid poorer districts receive in Title I and Title III, Economic Impact Aid, etc money).

As for the biggest problem in public education, to me one huge problem is local school boards. Many times, you get PTA parents, especially stay at home or retired women, that don't have much business or other experience. They have never managed people, let alone a budget north of $60-$100 million. I can't tell you how many times I have met other school board members, and walked away unimpressed by their caliber.

You get school boards with no experience hiring superintendents that aren't good leaders, hiring administrators with poor documenting skills, managing teachers whose evaluations are incomplete, or worse, non-existent.

And there's your biggest problem right there. It's not necessarily the unions, although firing bad teachers and admins should be easier. Lack of parential involvement too adds to the problem.

futuresmc says

Also, I didn't say you take the power from local school boards, only collect taxes and distribute the money at the state level instead of the local.

That has to be the most naive thing I've ever read. The money is the power. Local school boards would fight any state control of funding tooth and nail. Have you ever had any contact with a local school board, it's very enlightning to say the least.

Waitingtobuy says

You get school boards with no experience hiring superintendents that aren't
good leaders, hiring administrators with poor documenting skills, managing
teachers whose evaluations are incomplete, or worse, non-existent.

And there's your biggest problem right there. It's not necessarily the
unions, although firing bad teachers and admins should be easier. Lack of
parential involvement too adds to the problem.

While that's true, look at the biggest bugdetary items(overhead) and how they aren't even related to teaching, and yet if they're threatened to be done away with, the howls and screams come out in force.

Sports, or the cost of programs/equipment related to them, and it's for a very tiny percentage of the enrollment that uses/participtes in them.

upisdown says

While that's true, look at the biggest bugdetary items(overhead) and how they aren't even related to teaching, and yet if they're threatened to be done away with, the howls and screams come out in force.

Sports, or the cost of programs/equipment related to them, and it's for a very tiny percentage of the enrollment that uses/participtes in them.

Salaries and benefits are 85-90% of the budget. This goes for either public or private schools. It doesn't matter because school is a people-centered business. Until we get computers to teach students to the same level as humans, it will be this way.

I can tell you our school district is extremely well run. I've been in business for almost 25+ years, and have worked at Fortune 1000 companies. While your statement may ring true at some districts, there are districts that are well run. Which goes back to my original statement...school boards. Good school boards make teaching and programs a priority, and cut fat in areas away from the classroom. You name a subject that you think affects the quality of education and I can link this to a good or bad school board.

The problem is partly underfunded schools, or rather adequate funding. When you are eliminating programs left and right, this will have an impact on the quality of education kids receive.

bob2356 says

futuresmc says

Also, I didn't say you take the power from local school boards, only collect taxes and distribute the money at the state level instead of the local.

That has to be the most naive thing I've ever read. The money is the power. Local school boards would fight any state control of funding tooth and nail. Have you ever had any contact with a local school board, it's very enlightning to say the least.

Federalism empowers states over local municipalities just as it gives power to the federal government to impose its will on the states. If we passed a federal law that made school funding a state issue, the boards could scream all they wanted. The same goes for state legislatures taking over these school boards by themselves. Many states have done this on other issues. I don't see why funding should be different.

School boards have little power outside their local communities and states could easily crush them, especially if they had public support. Teacher's unions would need to be won over as they could help counterbalance the board's influence over the local community in many districts. It could be done. It's just a matter of gaining momentum and working top down.

futuresmc says

School boards have little power outside their local communities and states could easily crush them, especially if they had public support. Teacher's unions would need to be won over as they could help counterbalance the board's influence over the local community in many districts. It could be done. It's just a matter of gaining momentum and working top down.

Do you actually believe in the tooth fairy, Santa Claus, and the Easter Bunny also? World peace could also be done, it's just a matter of gaining momentum and working from the top down. It's clear you've never seen local politics in action.

futuresmc says

I don't see why funding should be different.

Because school funding affects absolutely everyone. Think realistically for a minute. Who would get funding reduced? The upper third of school districts. Who would get funding increased. The lower third. Who do you think puts state politicians in power and keeps them there? Yep, the people living in the upper third districts. Populist issues only get tackled with the consent of the people who pull the politicians strings.

upisdown says

While that's true, look at the biggest bugdetary items(overhead) and how they aren't even related to teaching, and yet if they're threatened to be done away with, the howls and screams come out in force.

Overhead ? Electricity, water, heat comes from County/City and they are not charged the same rates as any other homeowner/commercial owner. No one would expect a fire house to foot the bill of water used either.

Overhead is charged at a very low rate...

I would say - Nobody forced you to send your kids to private school. If you don't like what the private school does, you shouldn't have fucking sent your kid there. A big clue might have been when they made you sign a contract saying you weren't going to wear anything extra to graduation. Then a light bulb should go on in your head and you should think: "Hey, this school is a bunch of Nazi fucks, why am I paying good money to send my daughter here?"

I'm trying to figure out if Homeboy worked in a Union government job and posted the picture above on his Facebook page, if he would get fired or a promotion.

I'm leaning toward a promotion.

AverageBear says

Vic, I think this is the first time that I actually agree with you. "No Child" like many laws, have good intentions w/ shitty results that nobody thought about. When Bush signed this into law, many conservatives were annoyed....

It's also very annoying that Obama hasn't gotten rid of "No Child Left Behind" yet.

Waitingtobuy says

Salaries and benefits are 85-90% of the budget. This goes for either public or private schools.

I'm guessing that the salaries and benefits % are much higher in public schools.

zzyzzx says

Waitingtobuy says

Salaries and benefits are 85-90% of the budget. This goes for either public or private schools.

I'm guessing that the salaries and benefits % are much higher in public schools.

No, it's almost the same:
http://www.nais.org/Magazines-Newsletters/ISMagazine/Pages/The-Independent-School-Financial-Model-is-Broken.aspx

"Given that the typical independent school spends 75 to 85 percent of its budget on people, they have focused their cost-cutting measures on the other, non-personnel expenses. "

So maybe 5-10% higher in public than private. And that's because they pay private school teachers so poorly.

I went to both public (K-8) and private (9-12). My best teacher ever (and that's including undergrad and grad) had to quit working at a private school because he was as poor as a church mouse. The only benefit they get is being able to send their kids for free or a discount.

Why do people post links from obviously biased sources and expect any real discourse?

If an article is from foxnews or mother jones I'm tuning out immediately.

thomaswong.1986 says

upisdown
says

While that's true, look at the biggest bugdetary items(overhead) and how they
aren't even related to teaching, and yet if they're threatened to be done away
with, the howls and screams come out in force.

Overhead ? Electricity, water, heat comes from County/City and they are not
charged the same rates as any other homeowner/commercial owner. No one would
expect a fire house to foot the bill of water used either.

Overhead is charged at a very low rate...

One of the biggest expenses is for fuel for the buses and it changes with prices and not sure where it's at currently. But it's lumped in with all the operating expenses, and they're switching to propane fuel to cut the fuel expense by a little more than half. The freakin pool costs roughly 40,000 a year in maintenance. The gymnasium is in use every weekend during the school year, and most weekends in the summer.

zzyzzx says

It's also very annoying that Obama hasn't gotten rid of "No Child Left Behind" yet.

I thought that was Congress job.

upisdown says

One of the biggest expenses is for fuel for the buses and it changes with prices and not sure where it's at currently. But it's lumped in with all the operating expenses, and they're switching to propane fuel to cut the fuel expense by a little more than half.

seriously when did you ever see a school bus or any other county auto/truck use the same public pumps we use. They have their own sources and facilities.

Nope.. they have their own! they order it wholesale at fixed prices months in advance, transferred to their facilities and pumps. They dont even come close
to paying what you or I pay.